Now the Times and other so called mainstream British Newspapers are making up pathetic nonsense about a supposed Soviet style take over by the Russian secret service of discussions about the UK's future as the bulwark of the defenses of the "West". How about this for Neo-Con fantasy? Click here >>> http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/legal-ok-st73lrtvk

Here's what the rather more sensible and not so hysterical former Republican Presidential candidate Pat Buchanan had to say about the alleged Russian threat:-

Why Russia Resents Us

Friday, a Russian SU-27 did a barrel roll over a U.S. RC-135 over the Baltic, the second time in two weeks.

Also in April, the U.S. destroyer Donald Cook, off Russia's Baltic enclave of Kaliningrad, was twice buzzed by Russian planes.

Vladimir Putin's message: Keep your spy planes and ships a respectable distance away from us. Apparently, we have not received it.

Friday, Deputy Secretary of Defense Robert Work announced that 4,000 NATO troops, including two U.S. battalions, will be moved into Poland and the Baltic States, right on Russia's border.

"The Russians have been doing a lot of snap exercises right up against the border with a lot of troops," says Work, who calls this "extraordinarily provocative behavior."

But how are Russian troops deploying inside Russia "provocative," while U.S. troops on Russia's front porch are not? And before we ride this escalator up to a clash, we had best check our hole card.

Germany is to provide one of four battalions to be sent to the Baltic.

But a Bertelsmann Foundation poll last week found that only 31 percent of Germans favor sending their troops to resist a Russian move in the Baltic States or Poland, while 57 percent oppose it, though the NATO treaty requires it.

Last year, a Pew poll found majorities in Italy and France also oppose military action against Russia if she moves into Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia or Poland. If it comes to war in the Baltic, our European allies prefer that we Americans fight it.

Asked on his retirement as Army chief of staff what was the greatest strategic threat to the United States, Gen. Ray Odierno echoed Marine Corps Gen. Joseph Dunford, "I believe that Russia is."

He mentioned threats to Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Ukraine.

Yet, when Gen. Odierno entered the service, all four were part of the Soviet Union, and no Cold War president ever thought any was worth a war.

The independence of the Baltic States was one of the great peace dividends after the Cold War. But when did that become so vital a U.S. interest we would go to war with Russia to guarantee it?

Putin may top the enemies list of the Beltway establishment, but we should try to see the world from his point of view.

When Ronald Reagan met Mikhail Gorbachev in Reykjavik in 1986, Putin was in his mid-30s, and the Soviet Empire stretched from the Elbe to the Bering Strait and from the Arctic to Afghanistan.

Russians were all over Africa and had penetrated the Caribbean and Central America. The Soviet Union was a global superpower that had attained strategic parity with the United States.

Now consider how the world has changed for Putin, and Russia.

By the time he turned 40, the Red Army had begun its Napoleonic retreat from Europe and his country had splintered into 15 nations.

By the time he came to power, the USSR had lost one-third of its territory and half its population. Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan were gone.

The Black Sea, once a Soviet lake, now had on its north shore a pro-Western Ukraine, on its eastern shore a hostile Georgia, and on its western shore two former Warsaw Pact allies, Bulgaria and Romania, being taken into NATO.

For Russian warships in Leningrad, the trip out to the Atlantic now meant cruising past the coastline of eight NATO nations: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Germany, Denmark, Norway and Great Britain.

Putin has seen NATO, despite solemn U.S. assurances given to Gorbachev, incorporate all of Eastern Europe that Russia had vacated, and three former republics of the USSR itself.

He now hears a clamor from American hawks to bring three more former Soviet republics — Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine — into a NATO alliance directed against Russia.After persuading Kiev to join a Moscow-led economic union, Putin saw Ukraine's pro-Russian government overthrown in a U.S.-backed coup.

He has seen U.S.-funded "color-coded" revolutions try to dump over friendly regimes all across his "near abroad."

"Russia has not accepted the hand of partnership," says NATO commander, Gen. Philip Breedlove, "but has chosen a path of belligerence."

But why should Putin see NATO's inexorable eastward march as an extended "hand of partnership"?

Had we lost the Cold War and Russian spy planes began to patrol off Pensacola, Norfolk and San Diego, how would U.S. F-16 pilots have reacted? If we awoke to find Mexico, Canada, Cuba, and most of South America in a military alliance against us, welcoming Russian bases and troops, would we regard that as "the hand of partnership"?

We are reaping the understandable rage and resentment of the Russian people over how we exploited Moscow's retreat from empire.

Did we not ourselves slap aside the hand of Russian friendship, when proffered, when we chose to embrace our "unipolar moment," to play the "great game" of empire and seek "benevolent global hegemony"?

6 comments:

Russophobia is reaching new heights of the surreal. The latest suggestion by the DNC that it was Russia who hacked their e-mails to reveal the Democrats' handling of Bernie Sanders and hand them over to Wikileaks is more evidence of this. They might have done but it is unlikely but we have yet to discover who did. The attempts now to brand Trump as Putin's poodle are at fever pitch. This is because Trump wants to talk to Putin to bring peace to the Middle East and the world whereas the evil Hillary will just wage more wars on behalf of the industrial military complex, her Wall Street backers and the Zionists. She has said that Assad must go because that is what Israel wants. Any attempt by Europeans to forge a healthy working relationship with Russia is opposed by the Neocon/Zionist/Banker power base who will take us to hell in a handcart. They are portraying Trump as the warmonger in their usual process of transference as they have transferred their faults onto Russia.

Meanwhile, I caught an interview with Sir Geoffrey Robertson, I think, the human rights lawyer who is an expert on genocide. Any chance of you contacting him so we can pursue that path for the English, Robin? I suggest that bloggers watch CBBC where our children are being taught that racial and cultural fusion is the progressive and humane way forward. I am still worried that there is a genetic element to the success of Europeans and we are now in the process of destroying it with disastrous consequences for mankind. But doubtless, with the government's plan to eradicate "hate crime" even to suggest it might make one liable to prosecution.

Finally, I saw Ken Loach, the left-wing film producer talking about Brexit. He said that the time has come to tackle working class fascists all over Europe and to educate them. These are the people that he is meant to represent and feel a kinship with. But he does not as he is a champagne socialist and a member of the chattering classes who actually loath the "white working class", hence their hatred of Trump who stands up for them.The working classes are just fodder for their international socialist ideology and like Lenin they believe that ideology is all and the people are just there to make it work. Perhaps they will have to change the people as Brecht suggested.

There have been two programmes on tv recently that have left me distressed. The first was about Roger Bannister's four minute mile in 1954. A commentator said that it was a different but better world then, exactly, pre-pluralism. And the other was about the 1966 world cup with the only black faces being Brazilians in the Portuguese team. As if we didn't already know it we were made to realise that England and the English are nearly history. But there is still resistance as shown by their determination to stamp out "hate crime". But Brexit was the time when the English turned and once they turn you cannot stop them. The worm has turned, the genie is out of the bottle and who knows what the future holds now here, in the rest of Europe or in the US. Sweden is expecting terror attacks at any moment and I am told that the Netherlands will have a Muslim majority in 15 years.

My comment from yesterday has not yet appeared. Perhaps it will or perhaps it will not. Wall Street and the City and their puppet Hillary Clinton want a war. They tried in the Ukraine and they tried in Syria. They want to provoke Russia as their aim is regime change there as well as in China and Iran as they are the only countries they do not control. Their only answer to Trump is to laughingly depict him as a Russian spy. He has just said they will try to rig the election against him; he is probably right as they have done the same thing against Bernie Sanders. Hillary as commander in chief will wage bankster wars against all-comers.

I wait to see if my comments about Ken Loach, the left-wing ideologue, calling his erstwhile core voters, working class fascists, after Brexit appear. It is time to change the English people and replace them with Afro-Asians as soon as possible as they will not play the one world game. The same is true on the Continent. And now the House of Lords want to override the Brexit vote. As a leave campaigner said, this is a bunch of pompous, arrogant, unelected nobodies trying to suppress the democratic aspirations of the English people. Time to roll out the guillotines I think.

My second point was about racial and cultural fusion potentially destroying the genetic inheritance of Europeans which has been such a boon to a world otherwise stuck in the Middle Ages or even further back and the consequences for mankind. If it does not appear then I will assume that it is being deemed an example of "hate crime" which the government is now desperate to combat in an attempt to quash any resistance to their plans and those of their masters.

So Obama has said that Donald Trump is not fit to be president. This will be the Donald Trump who is being attacked for daring to want to work with Russia and Syria to bring about world peace. This is the last thing that the puppets of the military industrial complex want as the bulk of American taxes go to pay for their forces to engage in regime change and the weapons to make this happen. And nothing will change with Hillary, in fact it will most probably get worse. Can I ask Mr Obama what he thinks he has achieved in the last eight years? He has left America on the verge of martial law and the bulk of its citizens poorer than ever. And in terms of foreign policy, the man who received the Nobel peace prize has continued to be behind war all through the Middle East. No excuses, he is the commander in chief so the buck stops with him.

The world becomes a darker and darker place. Those who avoided flying and airports out of fear of a terrorist attack, are now told that French cross-channel ferry companies are to employ armed marshals on their sailings. Doubtless, the security at the ferry terminals will be as draconian as at the airports. Our armed forces are engaged in rescue drills should there be a terror attack on board a ferry. The Irish army has already done this as the fear is that terror will reach our shores via the Irish Republic.

It is difficult not to feel very, very angry and despairing at what the one world crowd have done to us, as my first crossing to Western France at the aged of 15 took place in 1967 when Europe was such a safe place to travel around. But if you are thinking of venting your anger, we now learn that a task force was to visit a Muslim school in Birmingham in a bid to install "British values". But not only were they to warn against the dangers of jihadism but the "far right" as well. It would appear now that in the eyes of the government and no doubt the EU, the two are equally as dangerous. Europeans have only a few decades left and as the storm clouds gather there will not be peace in our time.

It is five years today since the London riots following the death of Mark Duggan. The growing Black Lives Matter movement here staged demonstrations yesterday, one of which involved blocking the access off the M4 to Heathrow Airport.I saw the coverage on Russia Today and one protestor said that "racism" is everywhere, in Fortress Europe, here and in the United States. Here we have institutional racism and a racist immigration policy.

Racism, racism, racism, I am sick of hearing the word. We never did in the 1950s much except in the context of the Deep South of the US. Now we hear it all the time, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, racism, xenophobia. But there is only one race that is deemed to be guilty. The protestor said racism is everywhere. She did not mean in China, India, Japan or Black Africa. In her eyes only whites can be racist and only whites have to open the doors of their countries to the whole of the global south. In time there will be little difference between the global south and the north.No white country is able to opt to retain its national identity without facing the racism charge. Now they are possible planning further riots. We have seen them nearly every decade since the docking of the Windrush and Notting Hill.

Another spokesperson said that things are not as bad as in the US in terms of deaths but they are in other ways. The infuriating thing is that this is exactly the sort of situation that Enoch Powell predicted if we proceeded with a "multiracial" society, pointing to the never-ending black/white conflict in the United States.

So how have we ended up in this ridiculous and unnecessary position? Firstly, because of those on the Left who refuse to acknowledge human nature and the fact that there is no really stable multicultural society in the world; - the Rio games are being staged in a country which is still fighting white on black "racism" after several centuries - and secondly because of those who egged these well-intentioned but simple minded people own for their own malign hegemonic purposes.

I also saw an interview on Sky News with the owner of the furniture stores that was set alight in London on the night of the riots. He spoke lovingly of the attractive nature of the building which, I believe, was in a Tudor revival style. But he said nothing about the reasons that drove those who have been deprived and discriminated against by our "institutional racism" to act as they did nor did he express an understanding of why they would have taken such action. Surely, this would make him guilty of racism?!!